Opinion
Opinion By: Jack ConwayAttorney General;Michelle D. HarrisonAssistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
Alvin Gist initiated this appeal challenging the denial by Little Sandy Correctional Complex (LSCC) of his October 12, 2014 request to inspect the "Policy & Procedure for PREA." In a timely written response, Alicia Cantrell, LSCC Records Department, denied Mr. Gist's request on the basis of KRS 197.025(2). Upon receiving notification of Mr. Gist's appeal from this office, Assistant General Counsel Amy V. Barker, Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, responded on behalf of LSCC. Ms. Barker initially advised that Department of Corrections (DOC) Policies and Procedures (CPPs) are generally incorporated by reference in 501 KAR 6:020. The law library at LSCC maintains copies of the CPPs, including CPP 14.7, for inmates to review. Citing a line of prior decisions by this office, LSCC correctly argued that a "regulation retained by an agency is not the type of record required to be provided under the Open Records Act. . . .
The request is in essence a request that the agency perform legal research for him. An agency is not obligated to perform research in the manner requested under the [Act]."
Further, Mr. Gist is not entitled to access, LSCC asserted, because CPPs do not contain a specific reference to him. Quoting the language of KRS 197.025(2), incorporated into the Act by operation of KRS 61.878(1)(l), 1 pursuant to which DOC is not obligated to provide access to records which do not contain a specific reference to inmate requesters, LSCC also correctly argued that prior decisions by the Attorney General have consistently affirmed the denials of inmate requests for policies and procedures on that basis.
The Attorney General has consistently recognized that KRS 197.025(2) expressly authorizes correctional facilities under the jurisdiction of DOC, whether state or local, to deny a request by an inmate unless the record(s) contains a specific reference to that inmate. 2 This provision is incorporated into the Open Records Act by operation of KRS 61.878(1)(l). Because the requested policies and procedures are not records that contain a specific reference to Mr. Gist, under KRS 197.025(2) he is not entitled to inspect or to receive copies of those records, notwithstanding his underlying concerns. See 03-ORD-073 (regarding application of KRS 197.025(2) generally); 09-ORD-057 (affirming denial by Northpoint Training Center of request for certain policies and procedures on the basis of KRS 197.025(2)); 08-ORD-187; 14-ORD-199. Although LSCC was correct in asserting that a public agency is not statutorily required to perform legal research, 3 KRS 197.025(2) is controlling and the agency's denial is affirmed on that basis. To hold otherwise would "defeat the purposes for which KRS 197.025(2) was enacted." 00-ORD-2, p. 1.
Either party may appeal this decision by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882. Under KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General should be notified of any action in circuit court, but should not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceeding.
Footnotes
Footnotes
1 KRS 61.878(1)(l) authorizes public agencies to withhold "[p]ublic records or information the disclosure of which is prohibited or restricted or otherwise made confidential by enactment of the General Assembly."
2 KRS 197.025(2) provides:
KRS 61.870 to 61.884 to the contrary notwithstanding, the department shall not be required to comply with a request for any record from any inmate confined in a jail or any facility or any individual on active supervision under the jurisdiction of the department, unless the request is for a record which contains a specific reference to that individual.
3 Public agencies have no statutory obligation to conduct legal research "by locating relevant statutes and regulations pertaining to the subject of the request." 00-ORD-130, p. 4. In addition, this office has recognized that "legal research or reference materials, such as those found in an inmate law library, do not generally fall within the definition of a 'public record' codified at KRS 61.870(2), and therefore are not generally subject to the requirements of the Open Records Act." 00-ORD-176, p. 2. Accordingly, LSCC was also justified for this reason.